CALIFORNIA STATE COURT JUDGES, ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES , COURT ADMINISTRATION, OAKLAND CITY ATTORNEY JOHN RUSSO AND CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, DEFENSE COUNSELS, DEFENDANTS AND THEIR AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES NAMED IN EXTRINSIC FRAUD AND SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE CHARGES
All information contained herein is taken from materials filed in the case of Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim v. CSAA, Alameda County Case No. 811337-3
al-Hakim v. Rescue Rooter and CSAA case is an over $100 million,20 year; contentious legal action; that has the largest case file in the history of Alameda County Superior Court, with over 100 file boxes of pleadings; over 500 motions and responses; plaintiff had over 400 trail exhibits; over 15,000 pages of exhibits; 5,000 pages of documents for trial rebuttal argument; 20 expert witnesses; 90 other witnesses; over 200 pages of jury instructions; with 17 Judges being Disqualified, volumes of convicting proof of over 40 more judicial misconduct cases, where EVERY judge in this case has admitted error, committed perjury, recused themselves, or all three!
Most attorneys go their entire career and NEVER file a Challenge for Cause to Disqualify a Judge, in some cases it could dramatically affect their career irreparably.
The case has recently produced clear, irrefutable, established “smoking gun” evidence of the continued blatant illegal activities of defense counsel Stephan Barber and Ron Cook
in this and the underlying Rescue Rooter case that all their key evidence and testimony was clearly contrived and constructed in fraud and deceit and planted in the City of Oakland case file in August 1999 and the product of extrinsic fraud, planting fraudulent evidence, spoliation of evidence, and suborned perjurious testimony in support of their defense litigation strategy. It is further proof that the entire City case file was purged and re-constructed to accommodate the defendants litigation strategy in both this and the underlying Rescue Rooter case.
These activities were done in concert with Oakland City Attorneys John Russo, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong and former City Attorney Jane Williams and former employee Pat Smith; Stephan Barber and others of the law firm Ropers, Majeski; Ronald J. Cook, Randy Willoughby, Alex Stuart, Bradley Bening and others of the law firm Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; William Jemmott now of the law firm Wilson Elser; Todd Jones and the law firm Archer Norris; Daniel Crowley of the law firm Daniel Crowley & Assoc.; Fletcher Alford, Joel K. Liberson and the law firm Gordon & Rees; Sean Robert O’Halloran now of the law firm Crone Rozynko; Anne Brooks Harrigan now of the law firm Grancell, Lebovitz, Stander, Barnes & Reubens; Yolanda Marnell Jackson now of the law firm Jackson Alternative Dispute Resolution; the law firm of Caven, Cleaveland, Murray; the former law firm of Jackson Harrigan; John Ratto and Dean K. Beyer, of ASU Group (formerly D. L. Glaze); defendants Rescue Rooter and Bay Area Carpet Cleaning; and retired Judges David Lee, Michael Ballachey, and Richard Hodge. Retired judges Lee, Ballachey, and Hodge, though they live in three different counties, all coincidently hired the same Oakland defense firm. There has been judiciary litigation support given by now Appellate Judges Barbara Jones, James Richman, and Henry Needham and Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch whom had disqualifications or complaints filed against them with cover and sanctuary provide by Ronald M. George of The California Supreme Court, Victoria Henley of The California Judicial Council, Ronald G. Overholt of The California Judges Association, The Alameda County Presiding Court Judge Yolanda Northridge and former Alameda County Presiding Court Judge George Hernandez that portrays corruption.
ALL OF THESE PARTIES ABOVE were aware of or should have been aware of the blatant illegal activities of defense counsels Stephan Barber and Shawn O’Halloran in this and the underlying case and that all their key evidence and testimony was the product of extrinsic fraud, planting fraudulent evidence, spoliation of evidence, and suborned perjurious testimony in support of their defense litigation strategy. al-Hakim has previously served multiple deposition and trial subpoenas on ALL the parties named above and they have ALL failed to appear every time.
The depositions of Retired Alameda County Judges David C. Lee, Richard Hodge and
Michael Ballachey as well as those of Oakland City Attorneys John Russo(a former candidate for State Assembly District 16), Jannie Wong and Anita Hong were scheduled to begin on August 1, 2006 in Oakland California in response to charges of Corruption, Misconduct, Collusion, Cronyism, Illegal Ex-Parte Communications, Fraud Upon The Court, Spoliation of Evidence and Unclean Hands. The parties have failed and refused to honor those requests, the third such request and have now been subpeoned for the trial beginning February 15, 2008. They also refused to appear then.
Abdul-Jalil is a very well known, successful business manager, producer, and Muslim of native African-American descent from Oakland, California, that filed a federal complaint with the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, of a hate crime of Islamophobia and Xenophobia committed against him by Judge Lee during a trial in Superior Court of Alameda County, California, that is moving forward with the investigation and charges of criminal extrinsic fraud upon the court of the State of California, spoliation of evidence, and the doctrine “unclean hands” against defendants/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Ron Cook and the law firm of WILLOUGHBY, STUART & BENING; defense counsel Steve Barber and the law firm of Ropers Majeski; and those named above. The complaint, drafted and filed by me in pro per, has broad based support from Democrats and Republicans, was
submitted by Congresswoman Barbara Lee with the offices of Congressmen John Conyers, and Charles Rangel, has been review by several legal experts, with advocacy by former Republican Senator J. C. Watts, a client of al-Hakim’s.
The complaint addresses the concern that a Superior Court Judges’ conduct rose to the level of consideration for a Federal Crime and a Civil Rights violation because the bench upon which the judge rules is “under the color of law” and certainly the violation of anyone’s civil rights is a federal crime. “Muslims, just as any other group,
can not be afraid to speak up when their rights have been abridged. If one does not speak up, then the transgressions goes unreported and the perpetrator goes on to harm again unchecked, it does not matter whom the transgressor is” said al-Hakim. The complaint, perhaps even more importantly, not only requested Merrily Friedlander, Chief of the Civil Rights Division, to make an investigation of a judicial hate crime, but also the many other civil rights and due process violations of judicial misconduct, and attorney extrinsic fraud upon the court and law that are themselves directly the matters complained. J. C. Watts in asking “What does a supposed terrorist act in Russia have to do with the negligent contamination of a home in America?” posed the argument that there must be consideration of and a response to the many issues in the complaint.
After review in the U. S. A. G. Office, the case was thought of as being so egregious that even the infamous Bradley Schlozman, whom is now fired and facing Federal indictment with resigned Alberto Gonzalez for removing Democratic attorneys from the U. S. Attorneys Generals offices nationwide, sent al-Hakim a letter referring the matter (because of jurisdictional limitations) to the California State Attorney General, California State Bar Association, the California State Judicial Council, and California State Insurance Commissioner for investigation and prosecution. And these were Republican Judges and attorney’s being complained of!
Watch Alberto Gonzales’ Perjury Before Congress
California Attorney General Jerry Brown defended, concealed and thereby further complicitly committed the admitted willful and intentional extrinsic fraud upon the State, al-Hakim and his family, and the court; prosecutorial misconduct; willful and malicious prosecution; misconduct; conflict of interest; obstruction of justice; denial of due process under the law; willful and intentional fabrication and authoring false evidence; misstating and mischaracterizing evidence; misrepresentation and concealment of material facts with knowledge of the truth with the intent to induce the court’s act or reliance; harassment; and intimidation committed by District Attorney Tom Orloff, Maureen Lenahan, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, and accountant Mr. Lovelady and others unnamed in the DA’s office; as well as Commissioner Oleon’s abuse of discretion, willful misconduct, conduct prejudicial, illegal ex-parte communications and bias that resulted in error.
This onerous, odious taint and obvious complicity in quilt of these crimes makes it legally impossible for Brown to unbaisedly and practically investigate and prosecute the wrong doing of ALL the parties known to have committed these heinous, over 12 years of crimes against al-Hakim, his family, business, clients, community, and humanity as he himself defended the criminals and covered up the very same corruption he is supposed to be investigating and prosecuting!
This is one of the myriad of reasons this matter will be referred back to Congressman John Conyers and the Judiciary Committee and United States Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice for complete investigation and prosecution of the crimes against al-Hakim.
The depositions and investigation concerns trial Judge David C. Lee’s allowance of the illegal product of the spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office run by John Russo to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony, and fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury. During the trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damning nature to the defense and AAA as the hostile intervener, that were missing, altered, or incomplete.
Spoliation of Evidence and Unclean Hands
The City Attorney’s Office has engaged in acts to coverup these unlawful tactics, failed and refused to disclose to the court, nor inform the Judge of their improper and illegal transgressions regarding the fact of the defendants removing and taking custody of the City of Oakland files for several months and allowed the trial to proceed knowing their liability and the legal impact of their spoliation of evidence of the documents therein and their unpardonable breach in the chain of custody of the City of Oakland files.
Judge Lee “unknowingly” allowed the illegal product of the spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office run by John Russo to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony, as defendants and AAA fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury. During the trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damaging nature to the defense and AAA that were missing, altered, or incomplete.
al-Hakim and his attorneys Michael Michel and Jeff Fackler, had attempted several times to obtain copies of the City litigation file from January 2000 to June of 2000 and was told by the City Attorney’s Office that the file was “missing” and was last requested by defendant Ron Cook. Finally, after six months, in June 2000, Anita Hong called to notify Mr. Michel that the file had been returned and was available for viewing. At that time Mr. Michel was told that the file had been returned by CSAA’s attorney. al-Hakim called Ms. Hong and was told the file was back and available for viewing, and when asked who returned the file, she responded “it was returned by Steve Barber of Ropers Majeski”.
Presented next is the video of Ron “Con Crook” Cook boasting of having possession of the City litigation files, with the photos and Michael Michel warning the appraisal panel that the files had been illegally removed and was missing from the City and it was impermissible for them to consider the altered evidence.
al-Hakim contacted John Russo, the City Attorney of the City of Oakland several times by registered mail, phone and fax, regarding their independent knowledge of the interveners removal of the files from the City’s possession, and if such action was with the permission of the City Attorney. The City Attorney has failed and refused to effectively respond and such a non response, to ignore the fact that they have been caught in this transgression, reveals that John Russo and the City Attorney’s office was an accomplice to the breaking of the chain of custody of the evidence that was spoliated by the unclean hands of the hostile intervener, allowed the court to make the file a part of the record, and presented the spoliated evidence at trial. al-Hakim asserts that Russo’s and the City Attorney’s Office and the hostile intervener’s misconduct in connection with the Rescue case qualified as “unclean hands” as their actions meet the requirement that, to be considered as unclean hands, a party’s misbehavior must relate to the transaction in suit and to the adversary party.
You now have the municipality of the City of Oakland with John Russo and the City Attorney’s Office being a willing accomplice to the unclean hands of the hostile intervener with their breaking the chain of custody of the court files and providing them to the defendants whom absconded with the files, engaged in spoliating them and later allowed the court to subpoena those files into the trial record without notifying the court of this specious, treacherous act. This deprivation of al-Hakim’s civil, human and due process rights by the law enforcement body of the City Attorneys’ office of Oakland rise to the level of criminal activity and “misconduct by local and federal law enforcement officials. These actions are currently under investigation with Russo and his staff being subpoenaed to testify at trial.
AAA Worked with The Defense Against It’s Own Insured
al-Hakim has asserted that as relevant to whether these actions of al-Hakim’s own insurance carrier, AAA, there are equally as serious charges with regards to the actions of Cook and Willoughby Stuart & Bening; Barber and Ropers Majeski participation in the orchestration of defendants Rescue Rooter and Bay Area Carpet’s defense strategy against their client rather than represent al-Hakim as required by law. The witness testimony and evidence that was procured thru admitted suborned and solicited perjurious testimony by them and the defendants, they engaged in actions to interfere with their client and litigant’s legal case, engaged in actions to coverup the unlawful act of suborn and solicited perjurious testimony, committed fraud upon the court of the State of California, aided and abetted criminal activity, committed willful, criminal and corrupt perjury, fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, conspiracy, subornation of perjurious testimony and solicitation of perjurious testimony, fraudulent concealment, spoliation of evidence with the City of Oakland, their unpardonable breach in the chain of custody of the court files, has committed patterned willful, criminal, and corrupt deception and fraud upon the court, extrinsic fraud, spoliation of evidence with the disappearance of court records, and qualify for the doctrine of unclean hands.
No Impunity and New Charges Against Parties
The many other new claims including abuse of discretion, gross misconduct, conduct prejudicial, gross negligence, bias, the subornation and solicitation of perjurious testimony charges are inextricably intertwined with the truthful testimony and conduct of the named Judges Lee, Hodge and Ballachey; Defendant’s and their attorneys, agents, witnesses and experts; AAA and their attorneys, agents, witnesses and experts; Ron Cook and Willoughby Stuart & Bening and their attorneys, agents, witnesses and experts; and the City of Oakland Attorneys’ office, suggest that all documents, notes, meetings and conversations with and of the respective judges, witnesses, experts, defendants and counsels are admissible as to these charges for which there is no impunity.
Perhaps the single most important reason why Victoria Henley, Yolanda Northridge,
and Ronald George, heads of the displinary bodies responsible for taking corrective action in this case, has been so derilict in doing so, is because they are inextricablly placed in the legal paradox where every judge, court administrator, attorney, law firm, defenfant and their agents having been involved in committing these crimes, opens the way to legally setting aside every case they were ever involved with and potentially being reversed at an untold cost of money, integrity and irreparrable loss of pubilc confindence in the legal system.